That outbreak pattern looks highly suspicious. What are the odds that happened organically versus the odds someone purposely released the virus in these states for political/profit purposes?
The public is tending towards taking their chances with the disease over taking their chances with the vaccine. Doctors need to learn how to treat infectious diseases again.
There seems to be a pervasive acceptance here of the idea that childhood illness is "bad". Processing the world we live in through physical response is absolutely necessary. Strong indications are that healthier adults result from childhood exposures. Measles often requires no intervention, and when it does, it's easily treated. Measles, mumps, rubella, chicken-pox - all part of developing a strong immune system. Vaccines, not so much.
There also is a pervasive avoidance of the immigrant factor. Are these people vaccinated? I never saw a covid shot tent at a border facility. Or any other shot, for that matter. If there's such faith in the intervention, that population would have been aggressively targeted.
Finally, with fewer than 800 "cases", and tens of thousands of pieces of reporting, well, if I have to explain what's happening, you've forgotten the lessons of 2020.
If your child's MMR vaccine works, you do not need to be worried about whether or not my child is vaccinated. If it does not work, you do not need to be worried about whether or not my child is vaccinated but should wonder about why your child got the shot.
I was born in the early 1960's. I had the measles and chicken pox...and so did my siblings and every child I knew in public school. We DID NOT suffer any serious side effects, recovered and afterwards are BLESSED with LIFE-LONG immunity (for most).
Boomers - Share these facts with others, ESPECIALLY Millennials, Gen-X, Gen-Z Parents. They have and continue to live under UNNECESSARY FEAR due to the LIES and COERCION of the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex.
This 1962 article “The Importance of Measles as a Health Problem” by Alexander D. Langmuir (Chief Epidemiologist at the CDC/Communicable Disease Center)
Highlights how irrational our current obsession over measles is as a health threat. This isn’t unexpected as living memory wanes our understanding of things is undoubtedly going to be influenced by those with a self serving interest to have us believe something.
Langmuir makes the case that measles by 1962 had diminished as a public health concern, a rite of passage, not as significant as the challenges the common cold exerts on the public health system, but if measles can be conquered then we should.
He made this conclusion when the projection was that the measles vaccine would be a one and done vaccine that would mimic nature without the inconvenience of a fever and rash. There was no anticipation that the vaccine would be leaky requiring boosters, and there was zero expectation of adverse events from the shot. If these factors had been available when he wrote the article based on his opinion of how insignificant measles were as a public health threat surely his calculus on “because we can” would have been different.
These discussions should, but DO NOT address the actual danger of the virus(es) in question to humans. Many of us had measles as children, and while it wasn't a pleasant experience, it wasn't life-threatening. Given that reliable, above-board, "standard of care" studies on the safety of most vaccines are non-existent, and given that most viruses we've encountered so far are easily survivable, it's no wonder thinking people are opting to take their chances with naturally-occurring viruses vs. potentially toxic vaccines developed, produced and approved by people driven by financial incentives.
I expect a more critical analysis from Peter McCullough. If there are more cases of infection where vaccination is less widespread, what is the ratio between the percentage of measles infected people compared to those susceptible and the percentage of vaccinated people compared to the susceptible population? Is this ratio the same in all states with a similar percentage of vaccinated people, or does it vary similarly depending on the vaccination rate? Is the ratio similar in all states with lower vaccination rates? Or do states with similar vaccination rates not have similar ratios?
What would be the ratio between the percentage of measles cases detected among susceptible people and the percentage of tests performed? Is it constant? How are the tests done? Are they always confirmed by clinical diagnoses?
We need to look for inconsistencies in the data, if any. It can't be assumed that the data is always correct or not manipulated. Your team includes an epidemiologist, who I believe has methods for cross-referencing the various data and discovering any inconsistencies or performing data validation.
I don't see any critical analysis, I see the acceptance of official data regardless.
One thing that wasn't covered in your analysis is whether there was increased advertising (scare tactics) of measles vaccines prior to the surge. The vaccines can cause measles. So it may not be people just opting to not get vaccinated and therefore were susceptible. Maybe they got the measles shortly after the vaccine. That was the case in Texas a few years ago. The Vaccinated shed on other vaccinated and unvaccinated and infected them. So it was the shot that caused the outbreak. I suspect the same in these cases.
That outbreak pattern looks highly suspicious. What are the odds that happened organically versus the odds someone purposely released the virus in these states for political/profit purposes?
The public is tending towards taking their chances with the disease over taking their chances with the vaccine. Doctors need to learn how to treat infectious diseases again.
AMEN!
There seems to be a pervasive acceptance here of the idea that childhood illness is "bad". Processing the world we live in through physical response is absolutely necessary. Strong indications are that healthier adults result from childhood exposures. Measles often requires no intervention, and when it does, it's easily treated. Measles, mumps, rubella, chicken-pox - all part of developing a strong immune system. Vaccines, not so much.
There also is a pervasive avoidance of the immigrant factor. Are these people vaccinated? I never saw a covid shot tent at a border facility. Or any other shot, for that matter. If there's such faith in the intervention, that population would have been aggressively targeted.
Finally, with fewer than 800 "cases", and tens of thousands of pieces of reporting, well, if I have to explain what's happening, you've forgotten the lessons of 2020.
WELL said.
If your child's MMR vaccine works, you do not need to be worried about whether or not my child is vaccinated. If it does not work, you do not need to be worried about whether or not my child is vaccinated but should wonder about why your child got the shot.
Sandy - EXCELLENT points!
I was born in the early 1960's. I had the measles and chicken pox...and so did my siblings and every child I knew in public school. We DID NOT suffer any serious side effects, recovered and afterwards are BLESSED with LIFE-LONG immunity (for most).
Boomers - Share these facts with others, ESPECIALLY Millennials, Gen-X, Gen-Z Parents. They have and continue to live under UNNECESSARY FEAR due to the LIES and COERCION of the Bio-Pharmaceutical Complex.
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.52.Suppl_2.1
This 1962 article “The Importance of Measles as a Health Problem” by Alexander D. Langmuir (Chief Epidemiologist at the CDC/Communicable Disease Center)
Highlights how irrational our current obsession over measles is as a health threat. This isn’t unexpected as living memory wanes our understanding of things is undoubtedly going to be influenced by those with a self serving interest to have us believe something.
Langmuir makes the case that measles by 1962 had diminished as a public health concern, a rite of passage, not as significant as the challenges the common cold exerts on the public health system, but if measles can be conquered then we should.
He made this conclusion when the projection was that the measles vaccine would be a one and done vaccine that would mimic nature without the inconvenience of a fever and rash. There was no anticipation that the vaccine would be leaky requiring boosters, and there was zero expectation of adverse events from the shot. If these factors had been available when he wrote the article based on his opinion of how insignificant measles were as a public health threat surely his calculus on “because we can” would have been different.
EXCELLENT info!
Mandating, or coercing into taking, injections, medications, or any medical interventions is immoral.
These discussions should, but DO NOT address the actual danger of the virus(es) in question to humans. Many of us had measles as children, and while it wasn't a pleasant experience, it wasn't life-threatening. Given that reliable, above-board, "standard of care" studies on the safety of most vaccines are non-existent, and given that most viruses we've encountered so far are easily survivable, it's no wonder thinking people are opting to take their chances with naturally-occurring viruses vs. potentially toxic vaccines developed, produced and approved by people driven by financial incentives.
I expect a more critical analysis from Peter McCullough. If there are more cases of infection where vaccination is less widespread, what is the ratio between the percentage of measles infected people compared to those susceptible and the percentage of vaccinated people compared to the susceptible population? Is this ratio the same in all states with a similar percentage of vaccinated people, or does it vary similarly depending on the vaccination rate? Is the ratio similar in all states with lower vaccination rates? Or do states with similar vaccination rates not have similar ratios?
What would be the ratio between the percentage of measles cases detected among susceptible people and the percentage of tests performed? Is it constant? How are the tests done? Are they always confirmed by clinical diagnoses?
We need to look for inconsistencies in the data, if any. It can't be assumed that the data is always correct or not manipulated. Your team includes an epidemiologist, who I believe has methods for cross-referencing the various data and discovering any inconsistencies or performing data validation.
I don't see any critical analysis, I see the acceptance of official data regardless.
One thing that wasn't covered in your analysis is whether there was increased advertising (scare tactics) of measles vaccines prior to the surge. The vaccines can cause measles. So it may not be people just opting to not get vaccinated and therefore were susceptible. Maybe they got the measles shortly after the vaccine. That was the case in Texas a few years ago. The Vaccinated shed on other vaccinated and unvaccinated and infected them. So it was the shot that caused the outbreak. I suspect the same in these cases.
The real story on James Van Der Beek:
https://open.substack.com/pub/geoffwexler946269/p/flumist-flu-missed